Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:01:22 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Cc: kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far.... Message-ID: <420ED112.80401@pacific.net.sg> In-Reply-To: <20050213022605.GA24426@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20050213004204.GA91920@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050213021055.69766.qmail@web53901.mail.yahoo.com> <20050213022605.GA24426@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 06:10:55PM -0800, stheg olloydson wrote: > > >>Core being Core will do what they think is best, and they have every >>right to. That's not my point. My point is the discussion took place in >>secret. What I am suggesting is that when certain discussions take >>place that they be publicly readable. > > > Again, FreeBSD has never worked that way, but if you think it should > then you should raise the suggestion with core. > Could this be the real reason for the "acceptance" problem? In the same moment, this is also the reason for its strengths. A small number of people "controls" FreeBSD giving it a direction they think is best. This concept is what companies do not understand. If companies use Linux, they do it because it "comes" from IBM or any other big vendor. If something goes wrong they go back to the vendor with the big name. I do not see FreeBSD make bigger waves as long as this does not change not matter what name or logo FreeBSD uses. So, why do it then? Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?420ED112.80401>